green
Positive treatment
5.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002
2014
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Fain v. Mitchell
(2×)
See Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1067-68 (9th Cir.) (rejecting claim of equitable tolling despite counsel’s mistaken advice about AEDPA deadline), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1003 , 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002); see also Frye v. Hickman, 273 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.2001) (denying equitable tolling based on counsel’s negligence), ce rt. denied, 535 U.S. 1055 , 122 S.Ct. 1913 , 152 L.Ed.2d 823 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ratliff v. Smith
(2×)
See Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1066-68 (9th Cir.) (rejecting equitable tolling claim despite counsel’s miscalcu lation of the AEDPA deadline), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1003 , 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Moore v. Small
See Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1066-67 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002) (stating that ordinary negligence and legal mistakes do not give rise to equitable tolling).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tony Scott Grantham v. The People Of The State Of California
In other 15 words, “it is not enough for a petitioner seeking an exercise of equitable tolling to 16 attempt diligently to remedy his extraordinary circumstances; when free from the 17 extraordinary circumstance, he must also be diligent in actively pursuing his 18 rights.” Id. at 599 . 19 “The diligence required for equitable tolling purposes is reasonable diligence 20 … not maximum feasible diligence,” Holland, 560 U.S. at 653 (citations and 21 quotation marks omitted), and courts consider “the petitioner’s overall level of care 22 and caution in light of his or her particular …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jae Jeong Lyu v. Superior Court of California
In other 8 words, “it is not enough for a petitioner seeking an exercise of equitable tolling to 9 attempt diligently to remedy his extraordinary circumstances; when free from the 10 extraordinary circumstance, he must also be diligent in actively pursuing his 11 rights.” Id. at 599 . 12 “The diligence required for equitable tolling purposes is reasonable diligence 13 … not maximum feasible diligence,” Holland, 560 U.S. at 653 (citations and 14 quotation marks omitted), and courts consider “the petitioner’s overall level of care 15 and caution in light of his or her particular ci…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Billy Basaldua v. George Jaime
In other 22 words, “it is not enough for a petitioner seeking an exercise of equitable tolling to 23 attempt diligently to remedy his extraordinary circumstances; when free from the 24 extraordinary circumstance, he must also be diligent in actively pursuing his 25 rights.” Id. at 599 . 26 “The diligence required for equitable tolling purposes is reasonable diligence 27 … not maximum feasible diligence,” Holland, 560 U.S. at 653 (citations and 28 quotation marks omitted), and courts consider “the petitioner’s overall level of care 1 and caution in light of his or her particular c…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sekayi Rudo White v. Patrick Cavello
In other 12 words, “it is not enough for a petitioner seeking an exercise of equitable tolling to 13 attempt diligently to remedy his extraordinary circumstances; when free from the 14 extraordinary circumstance, he must also be diligent in actively pursuing his 15 rights.” Id. at 599 . 16 “The diligence required for equitable tolling purposes is reasonable diligence 17 … not maximum feasible diligence,” Holland, 560 U.S. at 653 (citations and 18 quotation marks omitted), and courts consider “the petitioner’s overall level of care 19 and caution in light of his or her particular …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Culver v. Director of Corrections
(2×)
See Frye v. Hickman, 273 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.2001) (attorney’s negligence in calculating the deadline for a federal habeas petition, resulting in a late filing, did not warrant equitable tolling), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1055 , 122 S.Ct. 1913 , 152 L.Ed.2d 823 (2002); see also Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1067-68 (9th Cir.) (appointed appellate counsel’s letter following direct review providing the Petitioner with an erroneous federal habeas deadline was not sufficient to warrant equitable tolling), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1003 , 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002); Majoy v. Roe…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Johnson v. Lewis
(2×)
See Frye v. Hickman, 273 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.2001) (attorney’s negligence in calculating the deadline for a federal habeas petition, resulting in a late filing, did not warrant equitable tolling), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1055 , 122 S.Ct. 1913 , 152 L.Ed.2d 823 (2002); see also Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1067-68 (9th Cir.2002) (appointed appellate counsel’s letter following direct review providing the petitioner with an erroneous federal habeas deadline was not sufficient to warrant equitable tolling), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1003 , 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002); Majoy v.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Eulloqui v. Pliler
(2×)
See Frye v. Hickman, 273 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.) (as amended) (recognizing that the lack of access to library material does not automatically qualify as grounds for equitable tolling), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1055 , 122 S.Ct. 1913 , 152 L.Ed.2d 823 (2002); see also Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1068 (9th Cir.), (recognizing that attorney negligence in general does not constitute extraordinary circumstances sufficient to warrant equitable tolling), cert, denied, 537 U.S. 1003 , 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wade Johnson v. Roy L. Hendricks, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey
See, e.g., Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1068 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002); Helton v. Sec’y for the Dep’t of Corr., 259 F.3d 1310, 1313 (11th Cir.2001), cert. denied , — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 1965 , 152 L.Ed.2d 1025 (2002); Smaldone v. Senkowski, 273 F.3d 133, 138-39 (2d Cir.2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1017 , 122 S.Ct. 1606 , 152 L.Ed.2d 621 (2002); Kreutzer v. Bowersox, 231 F.3d 460, 463 (8th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 863 , 122 S.Ct. 145 , 151 L.Ed.2d 97 (2001).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jackson
v.
Dormire, Superintendent, Jefferson Correctional Center
v.
Dormire, Superintendent, Jefferson Correctional Center
02-441.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 4, 2002.
Published
JACKSON
v.
DORMIRE, SUPERINTENDENT, JEFFERSON CORRECTIONAL CENTER.
No. 02-441.
Supreme Court of United States.
November 4, 2002.
1
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
2
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.